7 ms·

I don't have an idea on CPU design. Can this lead to M1 like performance?

by mrath 4y ago

destroy-2A 4y ago
I think the article is is saying it won’t lead to much of anything except headaches.
- ggreer 4y ago
  That's the impression I got as well. That made me discount Agner's arguments since they apply to Apple's M1, and the M1 is great in both raw performance and power efficiency.
  - r00fus 4y ago
    Difference: Apple controls software + hardware and can this immediately utilize hardware efficiencies like a new Arch with a simultaneous release. Intel doesn’t control Windows.
can16358p 4y ago
Not in its current form.
quux 4y ago
The goal of this kind of design is M1 like energy efficiency, not performance (I don't know if the Alder Lake P cores can outperform an M1 P core.) M1 has a similar architecture with performance and efficiency cores, but so far I haven't heard of it causing problems for software developers. All versions of macOS that support M1 also have a scheduler that is able to move threads between E and P cores nicely.
- zdragnar 4y ago
  I thought the secret sauce to M1 was largely that it was a new architecture, without the decades of x86 backwards compatible baggage, with an OS and software capable of running natively on it?
  - lstamour 4y ago
    Both, sort of. The secret sauce to M1 battery life is a combination of OS thread scheduling and efficiency cores. The secret sauce to M1 performance is having an architecture that doesn’t need to be thermal throttled as much as in other platforms. It’s not that Apple invented chips that are remarkably faster than Intel’s or NVIDIA’s, it’s that Apple invented an integrated experience on this new architecture with split performance & efficiency cores and did so while maintaining backwards compatibility with macOS x86 apps in a way that’s indistinguishable from M1-native apps. (So they kept the “baggage” as it were, and it still performs fine.) I expect Microsoft’s Surface line will catch up eventually, but the disconnect between Qualcomm/Intel as chip makers and Microsoft as OS vendor will slow down the transition for a good 4-6 years easy, and we’re 2 years into this transition to ultra-energy efficient architectures with less thermal throttling. (Full disclosure, I’ve a few Apple shares.)
  - nicolaslem 4y ago
    The secret sauce is most likely TSMC 5nm.
    - astrange 4y ago
      No, that’s cope. There isn’t any secret sauce. It’s just well designed on every level. You won’t match its power/performance by doing one thing and suddenly making it there. Intel’s process is quite close to TSMC’s already.
      - mhh__ 4y ago
        It's quite close to the process AMD are on but not 5nm that apple use. A lot of M1's advantage is in terms of density. That's why they were theoretically able to make such an absolutely enormous processor and keep it cool. Making that theory work in practice came from decades of low power semi experience. They're extremely good chip designers.
      - tyrfing 4y ago
        The Alder Lake node is about equivalent to TSMC's N7, maybe 10% better. N5, the node Apple is using for M1, is about 1.8x the density of N7 with 40% lower power usage. AMD and Intel are on similar nodes at the moment, but Apple has a very notable advantage. It's not "secret sauce" so much as paying many billions for exclusive access.
- unnah 4y ago
  My understanding is that Alder Lake P-cores have the highest single-thread performance currently available, but M1 Firestorm cores are close behind, and so is AMD Zen 3. Performance varies by benchmark, and each of them gets some wins depending on the application. See here for SPEC2006 single-thread totals: https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2020/2797 https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2020/2797
- karsinkk 4y ago
  Is there any reading material that you can share about the M1 scheduler?
layer8 4y ago
Compared to the M1, Intel is still restricted by the existing memory and I/O interfaces and by x86 compatibility, which means they can’t do certain things the M1 did, like the integrated unified memory (for massive memory bandwidth) and the relaxed memory model. And as the siblings explain, the P/E design is more about power efficiency than about performance, although the increased power efficiency does allow for more cores at the high end.
- jeffbee 4y ago
  The M1 has the exact same memory architecture as an 11th generation Intel Core series mobile CPU.
  - sliken 4y ago
    Not really, the M1 has a relaxed memory model, the 11th gen intel core series has a strict memory model. Generally the relaxed memory model allows better bandwidth and performance out of the same memory system. Not to mention there's the M1 pro, max, and ultra if you need more memory bandwidth.
kcb 4y ago
This CPU is already faster than M1 in single core. And multi core depending on the SKU.

I don't have an idea on CPU design. Can this lead to M1 like performance?

by mrath 4y ago

I don't have an idea on CPU design. Can this lead to M1 like performance?

destroy-2A 4y ago

I think the article is is saying it won’t lead to much of anything except headaches.

ggreer 4y ago
That's the impression I got as well. That made me discount Agner's arguments since they apply to Apple's M1, and the M1 is great in both raw performance and power efficiency.
- r00fus 4y ago
  Difference: Apple controls software + hardware and can this immediately utilize hardware efficiencies like a new Arch with a simultaneous release. Intel doesn’t control Windows.

can16358p 4y ago

Not in its current form.

quux 4y ago

The goal of this kind of design is M1 like energy efficiency, not performance (I don't know if the Alder Lake P cores can outperform an M1 P core.) M1 has a similar architecture with performance and efficiency cores, but so far I haven't heard of it causing problems for software developers. All versions of macOS that support M1 also have a scheduler that is able to move threads between E and P cores nicely.

zdragnar 4y ago
I thought the secret sauce to M1 was largely that it was a new architecture, without the decades of x86 backwards compatible baggage, with an OS and software capable of running natively on it?
- lstamour 4y ago
  Both, sort of. The secret sauce to M1 battery life is a combination of OS thread scheduling and efficiency cores. The secret sauce to M1 performance is having an architecture that doesn’t need to be thermal throttled as much as in other platforms. It’s not that Apple invented chips that are remarkably faster than Intel’s or NVIDIA’s, it’s that Apple invented an integrated experience on this new architecture with split performance & efficiency cores and did so while maintaining backwards compatibility with macOS x86 apps in a way that’s indistinguishable from M1-native apps. (So they kept the “baggage” as it were, and it still performs fine.) I expect Microsoft’s Surface line will catch up eventually, but the disconnect between Qualcomm/Intel as chip makers and Microsoft as OS vendor will slow down the transition for a good 4-6 years easy, and we’re 2 years into this transition to ultra-energy efficient architectures with less thermal throttling. (Full disclosure, I’ve a few Apple shares.)
- nicolaslem 4y ago
  The secret sauce is most likely TSMC 5nm.
  - astrange 4y ago
    No, that’s cope. There isn’t any secret sauce. It’s just well designed on every level. You won’t match its power/performance by doing one thing and suddenly making it there. Intel’s process is quite close to TSMC’s already.
    - mhh__ 4y ago
      It's quite close to the process AMD are on but not 5nm that apple use. A lot of M1's advantage is in terms of density. That's why they were theoretically able to make such an absolutely enormous processor and keep it cool. Making that theory work in practice came from decades of low power semi experience. They're extremely good chip designers.
    - tyrfing 4y ago
      The Alder Lake node is about equivalent to TSMC's N7, maybe 10% better. N5, the node Apple is using for M1, is about 1.8x the density of N7 with 40% lower power usage. AMD and Intel are on similar nodes at the moment, but Apple has a very notable advantage. It's not "secret sauce" so much as paying many billions for exclusive access.
unnah 4y ago
My understanding is that Alder Lake P-cores have the highest single-thread performance currently available, but M1 Firestorm cores are close behind, and so is AMD Zen 3. Performance varies by benchmark, and each of them gets some wins depending on the application. See here for SPEC2006 single-thread totals: https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2020/2797 https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2020/2797
karsinkk 4y ago
Is there any reading material that you can share about the M1 scheduler?

layer8 4y ago

Compared to the M1, Intel is still restricted by the existing memory and I/O interfaces and by x86 compatibility, which means they can’t do certain things the M1 did, like the integrated unified memory (for massive memory bandwidth) and the relaxed memory model. And as the siblings explain, the P/E design is more about power efficiency than about performance, although the increased power efficiency does allow for more cores at the high end.

jeffbee 4y ago
The M1 has the exact same memory architecture as an 11th generation Intel Core series mobile CPU.
- sliken 4y ago
  Not really, the M1 has a relaxed memory model, the 11th gen intel core series has a strict memory model. Generally the relaxed memory model allows better bandwidth and performance out of the same memory system. Not to mention there's the M1 pro, max, and ultra if you need more memory bandwidth.

kcb 4y ago

This CPU is already faster than M1 in single core. And multi core depending on the SKU.